I currently do a lot of work in ActionScript 3.0, I also love to program in Java. Is JavaFX perfect for me? What is the general feeling on JavaFX, will it become a power house, or go down the same path as Java Applets? Could the designers I work with become comfortable with JavaFX to the same extent they are comfortable with ActionScript and JavaScript?
Just wanted to add my $.02... I've been working in JavaFX for the last 4 days on my first little side-project using it. As some background, I've been programming professionally for about 9 years, starting with C, and have been doing Java and C#/.NET for the last 6 yrs.
IMO, JavaFX its way more frustrating that it should be. Here are some gripes:
The syntax is just odd at times. It could easily be more like Java, since its JavaFX. But the syntax isn't an easy transition from Java.
The order of items in a .fx file actually matters, which means you run into stupid circular reference errors, and "oh you can't use this variable yet because it hasn't been initialized" problems that the compiler should handle with ease, but doesn't.
Random things just don't work. Actions/events on Swing controls don't always work, for example SwingSliderBar's onKeyPressed/released don't seem to be called.
Error handling is just bad. If an exception occurs that isn't handled, there is no real way to tell other than the Java console, and UI elements start to react funny. For example, make a SwingText box and bind its value to a variable. Now trying to edit the value in the text box will throw an exception because you cant edit the bound variable. However in the UI, the text box just starts having funny things happen. some characters only 1/2 paint, sometimes backspace does nothing, sometimes it deletes a character, sometimes you can press 2 keys ont eh keyboard like "1" and "2" and the text box will end up having "21" entered in it instead of "12", etc...
Although my absolute #1 problem with JavaFX development right now is Netbeans. It is pathetically bad at JFX. Can't debug, errors display wrong in the IDE (I've had it flag comments as errors!), the intellisence only works like 40% of the time, event he code templates preprogrammed in the IDE for drag & dropping controls aren't correct. I forget which one, but one of them drops a "&" at the end of the inserted code that is never valid and always has to be manually deleted... its just plain awful, and is unacceptable for a company like Sun.
Another gripe is general documentation. Its just lacking. Somehow the JavaFX API doesn't even come up as the #1 search result on google when searching for methods/classes. Tons of "examples" out on the web don't work any more as every version has major refactoring changes, and classes removed or renamed.
Overall, I give JFX a 4 out of 10. I want to like it, but JFX 1.1 just doesn't cut it... its definitely not what I would consider "production ready".
A resounding "meh".
When I looked at it a year ago, they had a one-way SVG to JavaFx conversion tool. Great, so you can author your visual content once, mark it up with a lot of behaviour, and then the next time you want to make it look good, then what?
If you take a look at this tutorial you can see what I mean. We're drawing stuff by dragging shapes from a palette into source code. OMGWTF. I am not showing that to my graphics department.
I hope I'm wrong about JavaFx, but I don't think they get it. Please, won't somebody at Sun give us a presentation layer that doesn't have its tentacles inextricably intertwined with code?
I left my last job to move from Java to .NET development.
There were a number of reasons for making the move, but the single biggest reason was that I was sick and tired of trying to build 1st class UI software with Java & Swing. It has been six years and I'm so glad I moved on. I see no reason to believe that Sun finally understands UI development with JavaFX.
I am convinced that Microsoft is finally in the process of giving us a platform to build rich interactive applications in the browser. I say that after having built commercially available software which was delivered as a Netscape Plugin 13 years ago, followed by ActiveX controls and Java Applets, and seeing all of these platforms fail to become ubiquitous in the enterprise for one reason or another.
I realize that Silverlight 2 is still lacking in depth and maturity, but Microsoft has shown me enough commitment at this point that I believe it will be the dominant RIA platform in a few short years - at least for projects which require a "real" programming language. I am sure Flash et al. is not going away anytime soon, but Flash is not appropriate for the kinds of software my company builds.
The icing on the cake for me is the fact that I will still be able to use Visual Studio, C# and a large percentage of my current code base (the core engine which is entirely separate from the UI). Of course, if you are coming from ActionScript, this would not help you.
One more important point is the fact that Silverlight and WPF share so much in common. Our plan is to share a large amount of implementation between Silverlight and WPF versions of our software. It is only a matter of time before WPF is the standard for Windows applications – I don’t know whether that is a couple of years or ten years, but it will clearly happen over time. Being able to target the most popular browsers / OS’s with Silverlight and Windows from the same code base is a tremendous advantage IMO.
If you know Java then moving to C# is a piece of cake. And unless you are using one of the nice (not free) Java IDEs, then even the free versions of Visual Studio will be an improvement over what you are used to. The hurdle will be learning the new way of doing things with XAML – but it’s some pretty cool stuff so you might actually enjoy it.
Although it appears fairly powerful in terms of capabilities, I'm kinda blah about JavaFX because of its structure and implementation. It seems like a really half-hearted attempt at getting into the Flash/Silverlight market. Too scripty.
I would argue in favor of going the Silverlight 2 route, but I'm primarily a C# developer so I'm a little biased there. If you don't like that route for whatever reason but still want a richer UX for your users, I'd suggest Flex; it seems much better organized than JavaFX to me.
Just my two cents on the subject.
If you know Java but want to do the stuff you thought was only feasible in Flash - then yes JavaFX would be good for you.
Without a doubt it's going to be much more easier to merge your Java knowledge with the design stuff.
And I believe the tooling will only get better which will make it simpler to use.
Unless you’re working on an internal app I would stay away from it. Users generally don’t want to have to deal with another program that accomplishes the same thing as Flash. I don’t think its install base is large enough yet to make it convenient for end users.
I've been developing Flash Applications with Flex for about 2 years now and I decided to give a try to JavaFX because we are constantly getting user complains that they cant use the applications from their IPhones (and I love Java).
That's one strike for Flash (no wide mobile support).
To be honest I was quite impressed with JavaFX (in a very bad way).
The documentation is incomplete.
The script is simply awful; its this weird hybrid between JSON and R with a feeling of a Java-deja-vu.
I spent the first 3 days painting polygons and making gradients with CODE... WTF!!
I tried to convince my graphic department to try it and they simply don't seam to grasp how the production suite is supposed to work, they keep complaining that Flex skinning is way easy and looks better in the end (Which is absolutely true).
The "CSS support" is simply a bad joke.
It generally feels like a mediocre attempt to offer an option for RIA frontend.
I can only think of a couple of good things about it:
It can be run from an IPhone / IPad and almost all mobile devices.
You have access to all the Java code you want which is great considering the limitations that ActionScript has (no overloading, no private constructors, etc). This is a great thing for us the programmers, but lets remember for a second that this is a frontend/presentation technology... that means that users will have to actually see the thing, so if it doesn't look good and have cool animations / effects they wont dig it.
The Script is way less verbose that MXML files are (with the cost of being unintelligible).
Talking about performance... Flash Player is this huge green blob that keeps growing and growing until no RAM is left compared to how JavaFX runs (JVM rocks! unfortunately this has nothing to do with the actual JavaFX API its just that the JVM... well it rocks!).
It has this cool feature where you can drag the applet outside the Web Browser.
In the end, Im happy I have an option to go mobile but this is light years way of the matureness that Flex/Flash has accomplished regarding RIA applications. The future of Flex/Flash as a wide distributed web technology is not clear (it may end up being used only for annoying banners and online games), no one wants to depend in a close technology as the Flash Player is, that's why the whole Web community is striving to get Flash out of the picture (HTML5 video support, No Flash Player for Apple devices, etc). So an attempt to have an open one is always welcomed, it's just that JavaFX feels like this incomplete rushed beta version of something that Sun felt obligated to come up with in a weekend during a bad hangover.
I Hope this is useful to someone (and offensive to someone at Sun/Oracle =p ).
I've spent the weekend 'playing with it. I see nothing useful in it. It's a iteration of swing / awt. I guess it will be nice for mobile devices but beyond that its nothing useful.
Ideally I'd like to use flash but find it painful to intergrate with a backend of any type.
Well, the syntax of both ActionScript and JavaFX seem to share a lot of similarities, so maybe "Yes".
I'm learning JavaFX script at the moment and I actually like it. But what I don't like, and is maybe it's biggest drawback, is it's awful documentation, which is often not up to date or incomplete.
I've been working on a JavaFX application for several months now. Personally, I love the language. They seemed to me to have made some very smart decisions in choosing the syntax and language constructs (I can bore you with a list if you'd like). I've been programming in it for a few months now and it seems like a very efficient and even enjoyable language to program in.
I think its best use right now is for desktop applications and/or applications deployed through webstart. On the desktop it has a rich set of features and can still make use of the other features of Swing and the rest of Java. From what I hear applets are still slow on some systems, and without Android support the mobile capabilities are non-features. The applet/mobile/TV/web support seems to me more like a bonus for desktop developers then as key features that would get you to use the technology.
So it really all depends on what you plan to use it for. If you are building desktop applications that you want to run on the Java VM that can make use of easy multimedia and rich ui controls, then I think there are good reasons to look at the language. WebStart has improved quite a bit and makes for a nice deployment tool. If you are looking to build web applications, then it might be interesting, but for now I'd say HTML5/ajax are more relevant (you might want to look at ZK in this case). However even with HTML5 ajax has its limitations, and if you find yourself running into them then JavaFX may offer you options. For mobile platforms it won't be relevant until there is stable Android support - in that case I'd just stick with the Android platform itself for now.
Related
This question has been asked before somewhat, but I hope mine differs. My situation is I have been a desktop developer for 8 years (winforms and silverlight, also ios). More and more web contracts have been coming up for me but I have passed on most because they cause me more headache than what they are worth. I have just completed a dating website for a client in asp.net mvc. My problem I really have is with the development of the actual webpage layouts. Something that would take me minutes on the desktop equivalent would take me hours in the web, trying to align everything correctly so that it would look correct.
If I could streamline page development my web development would be 100% better and quicker. Can anyone give me any tips/advice? Coming from desktop development where you would drag and drop items on and anchor them accordingly.
I dont know if Im missing something or whether my heads web layout space, its in the desktop layout space. HELPPP!!!
Thanks in advance
Well, one BIG difference from desktop to web is that you are at the mercy of (so-called) standards.
in desktop development you know and expect consistency of rendering on the client - and thats why drag and drop, pinning, auto-resizing (of all elements!) is as expected 100% of the time. Your settings are in fact set - "set and forget".
on the web, you have to contend with whatever browser your user is using, what it can handle as far as "standards"
That's why it takes more effort and a mixed bag of tools to get to some parity across possible clients to your application.
So that's why really knowing code (instead of "design view") matters a lot - and it means a lot of effort as well. As time goes by though, you'll come up with your "trusted toolkit" and create your own (or use readily available) code and/or design libraries/templates (JQuery, 960 grid and similar, and a whole lot more).
And that's just talking about the front end.
You'll have to understand the "stateless nature" of the web/http and have to figure out how to persist data - you do this too in desktop dev, but its a little more fragile when it comes to web.
On the back end though, if you have a mature framework (i.e. .Net) you can have a lot of code reuse.
The "open" nature of the web has its pros and cons, and while the web has gone quite a long way to "mimic" the desktop, that term (mimic) says it all as well.
You'll also find "religion" on the web, and its rarely a good thing. I'm sure you've heard of this very mature technology called Flash and well, it seems that its suddenly out of favor - all because of something called iPxx :) A mature technology that has had more than a
decade of growth. Apparently "plug-in" is evil now (hint, Silverlight is...)
The replacement? HTML5 and Javascript and CSS which is graduating from mere styling to include things like transforms and transitions - not sure if that's a good thing - seems separation of concerns (MVC) goes out the door (but who am I to judge) ...which is in its infancy - don't get me wrong I've seen amazing things by the bleeding edge gurus - but bleeding edge it is and to avoid rambling, going back to my first point, subject to, yes, so-called standards of different clients (browsers, devices, etc.).
So yes, it's an exciting time to be sure. So as the saying goes, "stay young, stay foolish"...and never stop learning.
Well, there is no definitive guide to switch perfectly from desktop developement to web developement but there are some tools which will help you to accomplish your goal.
The best (and most expencive) tool would be to use dreamweaver:
http://www.adobe.com/de/products/dreamweaver.html
But be aware, sometimes, the html looks ugly. This could be the best practice. Build some designs with a tool and modify the html code to your likes.
What does a web designer need to migrate to Flex quickly?
A: tell me how I can get good fast
B: tell me why it would be unrealistic to learn Flex quickly
I want here both sides of it. Maybe web designers are not qualified, I'd
honestly like to know what it would take.
Thanks,
TELL ME WHAT I NEED
• Projects I need to complete in Flex
• Tutorials
• Key concepts
• Other technologies in a nutshell (webservices, SOAP, AJAX, HTML5 etc.)
MY SKILLS
• I code JavaScript (including HTML, CSS, XML, not much AJAX)
• Flash (hand code ActionScript 3.0 in classes, reasonable OPP skills)
• I'm a designer 'no computer science degree'
This Flex reference should include everything needed for beginning Adobe Flash Builder 4
To be honest, the tenor of your post is a bit irritating. Nothing worth doing comes easily or without some level of work. "How can I get good fast?" implies you either don't have time or don't possess patience to do things right. I doubt that's the case, however, and thus here are a few thoughts to your questions/bullet points:
A: tell me how I can get good fast
I don't know what you know, and thus cannot tell you how long it will take you to become a solid Flex developer. If you want to get good, you'll probably need at least some time; if you want to be fast, you can pick Flex up rather quickly, and your application may end up a buggy mess. Depending on your definition of "fast" (and what you already know, of which, as I've said, I'm completely ignorant), you'll probably have to take your pick between the two.
Growth in any area usually comes with experience, instruction from superiors, and learning from ones' mistakes. Getting "good" quickly is a concept which doesn't take these into account.
Your knowledge of Javascript, CSS, and design will certainly help, and I don't want to denigrate your current experience. Seven years of design is outstanding and a great gateway to Flex. Those skills, however, likely came with time and effort, and you should expect the same with most new technologies.
B: tell me why it would be unrealistic to learn Flex quickly
Of course you can learn Flex quickly. I picked it up in a few days, and have spent the last 2 years of my life writing Flex applications full-time. I consider myself well past proficient, and I still have quite a bit to learn. The basics aren't terribly difficult (esp. since you have ActionScript experience). Learning enough to be good, however, creates an explosion of new material to cover. Consider these questions:
Do you know how to architect a web application? Not just assembling a quick and dirty web-page with a few basic controls -- do you know how to build a full-fledged web application which is extensible, scalable, and robust in its communication with a remote data server?
Are you working with established data servers, or do you have to implement your own?
Do you know how to manage large data sets efficiently?
Do you know solid software design/development techniques and principles (DRY, YAGNI, KISS) and how to implement them in your code?
If you can't answer these questions (or answer them negatively), you probably have a way to go. If you can answer them positively, you're at least on the right track. There's still a plethora of things to know about Flex (some listed below), and each one will take some time to pick up.
• Projects I need to complete in Flex
This question is a bit vague. If you're referring to tutorials, you're repeating yourself (see your next bullet point). If you're asking what applications will facilitate writing Flex apps (e.g. FlashBuilder 4), you haven't done enough homework. If you're asking what programs we think you should write, you're asking the wrong people. See my next point...
• Tutorials
There are many tutorials for Flex development. Start with a basic Hello World program and add simple features to the page (e.g. user controls, multiple MXML and ActionScript files, packages, styles, etc.). You said you're a Javascript developer with HTML and CSS: why not attempt to rewrite one of your previous applications in Flex?
We don't know what topics you need to cover because we don't necessarily know what you'll be doing in Flex. If you never plan on performing HTTP requests, you probably don't need to learn this functionality (at least not immediately). If you will never work with server-side notifications to your app, BlazeDS and LiveCycle Data Services might not be important.
• Key concepts
Man, where to start? Data binding, Code behind patterns, MXML vs ActionScript, Flex Skinning, working with XML, MVC frameworks, the list goes on. No list of "key concepts" is going to make you good fast.
• Other technologies in a nutshell
(webservices, SOAP, AJAX, HTML5 etc.)
Here are a few things you might want investigate, depending on your needs:
BlazeDS
LiveCycle Data Services
Flex and HTTP
Asynchronous Requests in Flex
Mobile Application Development
My recommendation is to start with the basics, and see what you're up against. Build a "Hello world" app and extend it to include various other features. Then assess what you hope to build with Flex, and how you expect to retrieve data from a back-end server. These two points will help you decide what you'll need to learn next. From there you can research each new topic you're trying to address and how to do it correctly.
I have used Flex for about a year before deciding that I would rather develop Actionscript projects.
At the time, it seemed that the framework was too heavy for the kind of work I was dealing with, mainly small web applications , personal sites, portfolios this sort of thing. I also thought that Flex was like a odd hybrid , something targeting seasoned developers but at the same time , adding some function wizards that seemed to target beginners. It seemed overly complexed in some areas and way too basic in others.
On the other hand, the IDE was great , definitely no comparison with Flash CS IDE , so for me it made sense to stick to AS3 projects and use Flex , now FlashBuilder to write my code.
( I need to point out that I'm not a Flash designer, so working with Flash CS was never an option. )
It's been a while since I had a look at the Flex framework and I'm wondering about other Flex/Flash developers position on this issue.
Would you only consider Flex for enterprise level projects? What are the advantages of using one over the other? If you were a Flash developer and moved to Flex, what were your motivations? If you're creating both Flex & Actionscript projects , what are your choice criteria?
Edit:
Although I have received a great answer, I would have been interested to hear from Flex's users, what's your main practical motivation ( as opposed to philosophical :) ) for using Flex over pure Actionscript projects?
Preamble: my experience is primarily with AS3 projects built using a combination of the Flash IDE (FIDE) and Flash Builder 4 (FB4).
I generally prefer pure AS3 (PAS3) projects over Flex projects for the following reasons:
Size - Flex projects have a much larger minimum size than PAS3 projects. Not suitable for lightweight applications.
Performance - Flash is not known for its performance, and the layout computations required by a complex Flex application will hammer the end-user's machine. To them, things just end-up feeling slow, non-responsive, or "gunky". Unfortunately, this means that the applications where Flex might be most attractive (i.e. a very complex, adaptable, UI) are the exact places where it stumbles. In the end, you end up writing all this bizarre performance-enhancing optimization code that takes away most of the time you gained from using the built-in layout system.
Metaphor and Appearance - Flex aims to allow developers to provide end-users with a mature, flexible UI that has the same widgets and widget behaviors that they are used to from native applications. However, due to the performance problems echoed above, the UI never feels quite as nice or responsive as a native app. In addition, it's missing all of the OS-specific peculiarities that end-users are used to and will expect. I don't really understand the motivation to try to emulate native app development or behavior - you're never going to win that fight. Best to make something that stands by itself, which is what most native web applications are doing.
Flexibility - Dovetailing into the previous argument, Flash's main advantage is its ability to do things that traditional UI widget libraries can't do (at least not very easily). You can make some really, really novel UIs in Flash that just aren't practical to do in native apps without mucking about in OpenGL. Using Flex makes creating novel UI hard again (but it does make creating standard UI much easier, even if it is, in my opinion, sub-standard UI).
I'm curious if anyone has some good examples of Flex being used in any popular, public websites. Grooveshark is the only one that I know about (which is quite nice, but suffers from many of the problems I've outlined, especially on OS X where Flash performance is still poor).
However - it's a tradeoff. Always remember that your time is valuable. Your users might accept a slightly clunky, slightly confusing interface if it lets them do really cool things and that would mean that you could release it now as opposed to later. This brings is to the major downsides of PAS3 development:
Effort vs. Reward - You have to program all of your own UI. All of it. This can lead to some really, really bloated code where you have to define tons of event listeners for every button you want to create. I don't know how many times I've written various kinds of layout code specific to what I was working on. You can try to write your own abstract classes for these (which I have done), but at some point you're just going to end up re-implementing the Flex framework. Hardly worth your time.
Development - You can either use just Flash Builder 4, in which case you have to construct every graphical asset by hand in code (which takes forever), or you use the FIDE, in which case you can make lovely artwork but you're stuck with a stone-age code IDE and it takes forrrrrreeeeeeevvvvver to compile anything. Currently I use a hybrid setup where art generated in the FIDE is automatically imported into my FB4 project, but even that is not a perfect solution. They really need to be integrated better.
Another set of things to keep in mind: things that Flash sucks at.
Flash sucks at text. Do not try to re-implement a web browser inside Flash. Flash is actually quite good at displayed relatively small amounts of text that is unselectable (and, through the use of embedded fonts, is always pixel-perfect), but don't try to create large, expansive text documents inside your Flash project. First, performance will be terrible, and second, users will expect the text to behave the same way all other large text fields do in their native applications (most specifically, their web browser). Selecting text in Flash doesn't feel right because it doesn't feel how your OS does it.
Flash doesn't play nice with mouse and keyboard input - it constantly fights with the enclosing browser for focus. If your system needs either of those things, users need to click on it first. Don't fall into a trap where people will get confused because their inputs are going to the wrong place.
Flash is a performance hog - we've all heard this one, and it's not nearly as much of a problem as people like to think, but it does mean that you'll have to put a lot of thought into the performance of your system. Your UI should run at a stable 60FPS when being used and should not use much if any CPU when the user is not interacting with it. If your FPS dips below 60, then your UI will feel slow and gunky compared to native or HTML5 UI. Also make sure to watch for memory leaks.
In the end: user your head. Both approaches are just tools in your arsenal.
I've chosen Flex 4 as the most appropriate technology to develop a graphically-rich web application (its not a simple content-driven site), but worried about how the recent negative press (i.e. security issues) may effect end-user's trust and ultimately whether the user-base may drop promptly in response. (I don't care if my app works on iphones or ipads for now)
I think Flash Builder 4 is an great development environment and has minimized development time for me/my team. After some basic testing of graphical animations similar to that used in my app - HTML5 didn't perform as fast, is inconsistent with browsers, and some animations are jagged (I expect browser performance and graphic libraries to improve over time). I also 'personally' dislike programming Javascript as I am very fond of strong-typing to uncover mistakes quickly.
If you develop Rich Internet Apps, how are you responding?
Are you preparing to potentially migrate to HTML5/Javascript? Java? No action?
BTW - I don't want pro/anti-flash arguments - just curious to see how the community is responding.
At the end of the day, Flash/Flex aren't going anywhere. If Flex 4 meets your current needs and you're aware of the limitations (ie can't deploy to iOS devices) then I say go for it. Yes it's true that the topic has become mildly politicized - but if you're offering something your clients need then they'd be silly to refuse to use it on the grounds that they support "HTML 5" - when HTML 5 clearly doesn't offer you the tools you need.
Plenty of awesome stuff is coming down the pipe in Flash, much of which simply can't be done any other way - google UJam for an example. I wouldn't let Steve Jobs scare you away from using the technology that works for your needs.
My company plans to continue with Flash, using FlashBuilder 4 and Java back end. We went with Flex/Flash several years ago to get out of the business of supporting all the different browsers and into the business of being productive and giving our users a rich client-side experience.
HTML5/Javascript have potential, but are nowhere near as robust, powerful, fast, or efficient. The class hierarchy, data typing, and event model alone put ActionScript 3 miles beyond any Javascript. So what if Steve Jobs gives Flash the thumbs down? Time-Warner and other big media companies have said they're going to continue with Flash, so it's only a matter of time before Steve Jobs either relegates Apple to permanent niche status or caves and allows Flash on Apple products. (My guess is for the immediate future he will prefer niche status to admitting he is wrong—look how long he maintained a mouse only needed a single button?—but that's just my opinion.) In any case, Flash will soon be available on a multitude of smart phones, including the Droid, so I am not worried.
Adobe will provide tools to convert to HTML5, but they are already following the HTML5 Path with some introductory tools. Just keep watch on adobe. They know what is going on. They just killed mobile flash so even though they argued with apple over it they finally did the right thing instead of stupidly holding on to it just because... hope that helps
I'm a Flex developer, but I think HTML5 is going to be huge. The full features of HTML5 are years away, and I don't think it's totally going to kill Flash. Flex will hold on to some part of the RIA market because it has a lot more going for than just a de facto standard client plugin -- LCDS/BlazeDS, plays nicely with ColdFusion and Java.
I like Flex for the long run. It'll lose some ground to HTML5, but there are areas where Flex will hold its advantage.
Disclaimer: I am author of Web Atoms JS
Flex/Flash is dead already, as usage of non PC devices is increasing everyday. Except old IE (IE<10) almost all features of Flash are already offered by browsers. File API, AJAX upload with progress bar,Canvas API, Indexed DB, Cross Domain message API & Web Sockets. And CSS3, WebGL with 3D can give flash like graphics.
Regarding Component Library & Binding, HTML5+JS lacks component driven development that flash offers. To bridge this gap, we created framework that gives similar functionality with all components to that of flex. Look at following image & see this blog which outlines similarities between Flex & Web Atoms JS.
http://akashkava.com/blog/439/migrating-from-flex-to-html5-with-web-atoms-js/
Here is link to documentation.
http://webatomsjs.neurospeech.com/docs
I've just finished a flash project where I did the entire project in "pure" AS3, without the use of the Flex framework. I found very little written about this on the web, so I'm not sure if this is a common way to develop RIA's, or if I've jumped off the shoulders of giants and done something stupid that will bite me later.
It seemed like a good idea at the time (famous last words!), but was hoping to hear from someone who could confirm.
Thanks,
Marcus
There's nothing wrong with it. People do that every day using FlashDevelop and AS3-only frameworks like PureMVC. Doing a complex app without any framework to support may get difficult to support in the future, but should be OK if you adhere to well known best practices. Future maintainability, especially if it has to be maintained be someone else, can also be greatly improved by using common design patterns throughout your code and architecture. Barring all that, if you're really just slinging code to build something with any real complexity, you're probably screwed unless you documented every function and the overall architecture very very well. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but some day you're (or someone else is) screwed! ;)
Flex is nice if you want to create something that looks great real fast within the confines of what the Flex framework gives you.
We used to fight weird framework bugs which Adobe didn't seem to care about or took way too long to fix. So we opted to drop Flex in favor of our own UI framework and we've never looked back since.
Sounds like a perfectly good idea. Flex is really just an overlay of rapid-prototyping, and communication standards, on top of pure AS3.
What you gain in ease of development and a large library and API, you lose in streamlined, strength and simplicity.
I'm currently developing a medium sized app in Flex and although the first phase of development was a breeze, the later stages have been fraught with weird framework eccentricities.
It is definitely okay. For example, I've heard that the Issuu.com platform is not based on Flex but a custom framework.
Thanks all! I've been very happy with AS3, and like the amount of control I get, as opposed to using MXML/Flex. It's good to hear I'm not crazy!